26 replies to this topic

[Mechteric]

The better question is "So why not Cryengine 3?" Unless you are a developer and know all the pros and cons of each game engine I would have to say from our perspective as a game we don't care so long as it looks and plays good. Both engines seem to offer that, so it is just whichever suits the developers best and they chose Cryengine. Done and done.

[Adrienne Vorton]

seriously, most online games i played on unreal engine 3 were totally rubbish... performance wise... lets see how Cry engine works

Edited by Adrienne Vorton, 19 June 2012 - 06:05 AM.

[OfficerTaco]

CryEngine 3 is one of the more high-quality engines, you have to do some serious modifying to get unreal engine 3 to do the same things that CryEngine can do.

Gears of War 3 pushed Unreal Engine 3 as far as it can go, and they have used that engine many, many times. In fact THEY INVENTED IT.

Edited by NotoriousForce, 19 June 2012 - 06:53 AM.

[Kittygrinder]

Maffa, on 19 June 2012 - 06:42 AM, said:

well crysis 2 may need less HW than crysis 1 because crysis 1 was a better, sandbox game than the mediocre (game design-wise and graphic wise) staged shooter crysis 2.

That has nothing to do with it. (oh, and i never played crysis 2, but crysis 1 was really really meh. Aside from the pretty, the game didnt have much else going for it.)

Edited by Kittygrinder, 19 June 2012 - 06:57 AM.

[BeforeLife]

IIRC since Unreal Engine 3 is so commen, it is also way easier to hack. So thats another plus to Cryengine-3

[Raalic]

Cryengine handles physics like a champ, it looks great, and, honestly, it's not very demanding. It's perfect for a F2P game that plans to be relevant in 3 years.

Edited by Raalic, 19 June 2012 - 07:44 AM.